Let's say I have a DataLoader
dataloader = DataLoader(dataset, batch_size=32)
I want to define a neural network that can feed forward my custom function. I know in traditional fully-connected network, I could just using its Linear or other already existed functions. And, importantly, those functions can feed with DataLoader and automatically run with batch.
Now I want to define my own function, but I don't know how to write it without for loop. For example (I randomly write some custom function f(x)),
def f(x):
x = np.sin(np.exp(x)) + np.log(x) - 1/x
return x
class NeuralNet(nn.Module):
def __init__(self, input_dim):
super(NeuralNet, self).__init__()
self.net = f
def forward(self, x_batch):
result = torch.zeros(len(x_batch))
for i in len(x_batch):
result[i] = self.net(x_batch[i])
return result
Or for loop in f
def f(x_batch):
result = torch.zeros(len(x_batch))
for i in range(x_batch):
result[i] = np.sin(np.exp(x_batch[i])) + np.log(x_batch[i]) - 1/x_batch[i]
return result
class NeuralNet(nn.Module):
def __init__(self, input_dim):
super(NeuralNet, self).__init__()
self.net = f
def forward(self, x_batch):
return self.net(x_batch)
Is there any way to get rid of for loop, in order to do parallel calculation on GPU? Cause I think for loop is not going to utilize the advantage of GPU. Or did I misunderstand something?
Basic mathematical operators implemented in PyTorch work with n-dimension tensors out-of-the-box. If you define your f function this way, you can feed the whole batch in one go.
In your case you could do:
def f(x):
x = torch.sin(torch.exp(x)) + torch.log(x) - 1/x
return x
class NeuralNet(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(NeuralNet, self).__init__()
self.net = f
def forward(self, x_batch):
result = self.net(x_batch)
return result
>>> net = NeuralNet()
>>> net(torch.tensor([[1,2,3]]))
If you stick with PyTorch operators (most have a backward function implemented) and don't switch to Numpy at some point. Then you will be able to call the backward pass on your model.
Of course, all of these computations can be carried out on the GPU!
Pennylane provides a torch layer
https://pennylane.readthedocs.io/en/stable/code/api/pennylane.qnn.TorchLayer.html
Related
I'm trying to get my toy network to learn a sine wave.
I output (via tanh) a number between -1 and 1, and I want the network to minimise the following loss, where self(x) are the predictions.
loss = -torch.mean(self(x)*y)
This should be equivalent to trading a stock with a sinusoidal price, where self(x) is our desired position, and y are the returns of the next time step.
The issue I'm having is that the network doesn't learn anything. It does work if I change the loss function to be torch.mean((self(x)-y)**2) (MSE), but this isn't what I want. I'm trying to focus the network on 'making a profit', not making a prediction.
I think the issue may be related to the convexity of the loss function, but I'm not sure, and I'm not certain how to proceed. I've experimented with differing learning rates, but alas nothing works.
What should I be thinking about?
Actual code:
%load_ext tensorboard
import matplotlib.pyplot as plt; plt.rcParams["figure.figsize"] = (30,8)
import torch;from torch.utils.data import Dataset, DataLoader
import torch.nn.functional as F;import pytorch_lightning as pl
from torch import nn, tensor
def piecewise(x): return 2*(x>0)-1
class TsDs(torch.utils.data.Dataset):
def __init__(self, s, l=5): super().__init__();self.l,self.s=l,s
def __len__(self): return self.s.shape[0] - 1 - self.l
def __getitem__(self, i): return self.s[i:i+self.l], torch.log(self.s[i+self.l+1]/self.s[i+self.l])
def plt(self): plt.plot(self.s)
class TsDm(pl.LightningDataModule):
def __init__(self, length=5000, batch_size=1000): super().__init__();self.batch_size=batch_size;self.s = torch.sin(torch.arange(length)*0.2) + 5 + 0*torch.rand(length)
def train_dataloader(self): return DataLoader(TsDs(self.s[:3999]), batch_size=self.batch_size, shuffle=True)
def val_dataloader(self): return DataLoader(TsDs(self.s[4000:]), batch_size=self.batch_size)
dm = TsDm()
class MyModel(pl.LightningModule):
def __init__(self, learning_rate=0.01):
super().__init__();self.learning_rate = learning_rate
super().__init__();self.learning_rate = learning_rate
self.conv1 = nn.Conv1d(1,5,2)
self.lin1 = nn.Linear(20,3);self.lin2 = nn.Linear(3,1)
# self.network = nn.Sequential(nn.Conv1d(1,5,2),nn.ReLU(),nn.Linear(20,3),nn.ReLU(),nn.Linear(3,1), nn.Tanh())
# self.network = nn.Sequential(nn.Linear(5,5),nn.ReLU(),nn.Linear(5,3),nn.ReLU(),nn.Linear(3,1), nn.Tanh())
def forward(self, x):
out = x.unsqueeze(1)
out = self.conv1(out)
out = out.reshape(-1,20)
out = nn.ReLU()(out)
out = self.lin1(out)
out = nn.ReLU()(out)
out = self.lin2(out)
return nn.Tanh()(out)
def step(self, batch, batch_idx, stage):
x, y = batch
loss = -torch.mean(self(x)*y)
# loss = torch.mean((self(x)-y)**2)
print(loss)
self.log("loss", loss, prog_bar=True)
return loss
def training_step(self, batch, batch_idx): return self.step(batch, batch_idx, "train")
def validation_step(self, batch, batch_idx): return self.step(batch, batch_idx, "val")
def configure_optimizers(self): return torch.optim.SGD(self.parameters(), lr=self.learning_rate)
#logger = pl.loggers.TensorBoardLogger(save_dir="/content/")
mm = MyModel(0.1);trainer = pl.Trainer(max_epochs=10)
# trainer.tune(mm, dm)
trainer.fit(mm, datamodule=dm)
#
If I understand you correctly, I think that you were trying to maximize the unnormalized correlation between the network's prediction, self(x), and the target value y.
As you mention, the problem is the convexity of the loss wrt the model weights. One way to see the problem is to consider that the model is a simple linear predictor w'*x, where w is the model weights, w' it's transpose, and x the input feature vector (assume a scalar prediction for now). Then, if you look at the derivative of the loss wrt the weight vector (i.e., the gradient), you'll find that it no longer depends on w!
One way to fix this is change the loss to,
loss = -torch.mean(torch.square(self(x)*y))
or
loss = -torch.mean(torch.abs(self(x)*y))
You will have another big problem, however: these loss functions encourage unbound growth of the model weights. In the linear case, one solves this by a Lagrangian relaxation of a hard constraint on, for example, the norm of the model weight vector. I'm not sure how this would be done with neural networks as each layer would need it's own Lagrangian parameter...
I am trying to create a data pipeline for U-net for Image Segmentation. I came across Keras.utils.Sequence class through which, I can create a data pipeline, But I am unable to understand how this is working.
link for the code Keras code , Source code
def __iter__(self):
"""Create a generator that iterate over the Sequence."""
for item in (self[i] for i in range(len(self))):
yield item
I will highly appreciate if anyone can tell me how this works ?
You don't need a generator. The sequence class is there to manage that. You need to define a class inherited from tensorflow.keras.utils.Sequence and define the methods:
__init__, __getitem__, __len__. In addition, you can define the method on_epoch_end, which is called at the end of each epoch and is usually used to shuffle the sample indexes.
There is an example in the link you gave Tensorflow Sequence.
Below is another example of Sequence.
Note that you can pass the data to the __init__ constructor, but you may as well read the data from files in the __getitem__ method, assuming you know where to read it, e.g. by passing the name of a directory or directories into the constructor. This is necessary if there is a lot of data.
from tensorflow import keras
import numpy as np
class SequenceExample(keras.utils.Sequence):
def __init__(self, x_in, y_in, batch_size, shuffle=True):
# Initialization
self.batch_size = batch_size
self.shuffle = shuffle
self.x = x_in
self.y = y_in
self.datalen = len(y_in)
self.indexes = np.arange(self.datalen)
if self.shuffle:
np.random.shuffle(self.indexes)
def __getitem__(self, index):
# get batch indexes from shuffled indexes
batch_indexes = self.indexes[index*self.batch_size:(index+1)*self.batch_size]
x_batch = self.x[batch_indexes]
y_batch = self.y[batch_indexes]
return x_batch, y_batch
def __len__(self):
# Denotes the number of batches per epoch
return self.datalen // self.batch_size
def on_epoch_end(self):
# Updates indexes after each epoch
self.indexes = np.arange(self.datalen)
if self.shuffle:
np.random.shuffle(self.indexes)
I am re-implementing the Invertible Residual Networks architecture.
class iResNetBlock(nn.Module):
def __init__(self, input_size, hidden_size):
self.bottleneck = nn.Sequential(
LinearContraction(input_size, hidden_size),
LinearContraction(hidden_size, input_size),
nn.ReLU(),
)
def forward(self, x):
return x + self.bottleneck(x)
def inverse(self, y):
x = y.clone()
while not converged:
# fixed point iteration
x = y - self.bottleneck(x)
return x
I want to add a custom backward pass to the inverse function. Since it is a fixed point iteration, one can make use of the implicit function theorem to avoid unrolling of the loop, and instead compute the gradient by solving a linear system. This is for example done in the Deep Equilibrium Models architecture.
def inverse(self, y):
with torch.no_grad():
x = y.clone()
while not converged:
# fixed point iteration
x = y - self.bottleneck(x)
return x
def custom_backward_inverse(self, grad_output):
pass
How do I register my custom backwards pass for this function? I want that, when I later define some loss such as r = loss(y, model.inverse(other_model(model(x)))), that r.backwards() correctly uses my custom gradient for the inverse call.
Ideally the solution should be torchscript-compatible.
I'm exporting a PyTorch model via TorchScript tracing, but I'm facing issues. Specifically, I have to perform some operations on tensor sizes, but the JIT compilers hardcodes the variable shapes as constants, braking compatibility with tensor of different sizes.
For example, create the class:
class Foo(nn.Module):
"""Toy class that plays with tensor shape to showcase tracing issue.
It creates a new tensor with the same shape as the input one, except
for the last dimension, which is doubled. This new tensor is filled
based on the values of the input.
"""
def __init__(self):
nn.Module.__init__(self)
def forward(self, x):
new_shape = (x.shape[0], 2*x.shape[1]) # incriminated instruction
x2 = torch.empty(size=new_shape)
x2[:, ::2] = x
x2[:, 1::2] = x + 1
return x2
and run the test code:
x = torch.randn((3, 5)) # create example input
foo = Foo()
traced_foo = torch.jit.trace(foo, x) # trace
print(traced_foo(x).shape) # obviously this works
print(traced_foo(x[:, :4]).shape) # but fails with a different shape!
I could solve the issue by scripting, but in this case I really need to use tracing. Moreover, I think that tracing should be able to handle tensor size manipulations correctly.
but in this case I really need to use tracing
You can freely mix torch.script and torch.jit wherever needed. For example one could do this:
import torch
class MySuperModel(torch.nn.Module):
def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs):
super().__init__()
self.scripted = torch.jit.script(Foo(*args, **kwargs))
self.traced = Bar(*args, **kwargs)
def forward(self, data):
return self.scripted(self.traced(data))
model = MySuperModel()
torch.jit.trace(model, (input1, input2))
You could also move part of the functionality dependent on shape to separate function and decorate it with #torch.jit.script:
#torch.jit.script
def _forward_impl(x):
new_shape = (x.shape[0], 2*x.shape[1]) # incriminated instruction
x2 = torch.empty(size=new_shape)
x2[:, ::2] = x
x2[:, 1::2] = x + 1
return x2
class Foo(nn.Module):
def forward(self, x):
return _forward_impl(x)
There is no other way than script for that as it has to understand your code. With tracing it merely records operations you perform on the tensor and has no knowledge of control flow dependent on data (or shape of data).
Anyway, this should cover most of the cases and if it doesn't you should be more specific.
This bug has been fixed on 1.10.2
I was following this method
(https://discuss.pytorch.org/t/dynamic-parameter-declaration-in-forward-function/427) to dynamically assign parameters in forward function.
However, my parameter is not just one single weight tensor but it is nn.Sequential.
When I implement below:
class MyModule(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
# you need to register the parameter names earlier
self.register_parameter('W_di', None)
def forward(self, input):
if self.W_di is None:
self.W_di = nn.Sequential(
nn.Linear(mL_n * 2, 1024),
nn.ReLU(),
nn.Linear(1024, self.hS)).to(device)
I get the following error.
TypeError: cannot assign 'torch.nn.modules.container.Sequential' as parameter 'W_di' (torch.nn.Parameter or None expected)
Is there any way that I can register nn.Sequential as a whole param? Thanks!
If you or other users still have this problem, one solution to consider is using nn.ModuleList instead of nn.Sequential.
While nn.Sequential is useful for defining a fixed sequence of layers in PyTorch, nn.ModuleList is a more flexible container that allows direct access and modification of individual layers within the list. This can be especially helpful when dealing with dynamic models or architectures that require more complex layer arrangements.
My gut feeling is that you cannot do it. Even in the static model declaration, nn.Module also specifies the parameters of every sub-modules (e.g., nn.Conv2d or nn.Linear) in a nested way. That is, every kernel or bias is registered one by one and independently.
One workaround might be to introduce dynamic sub-modules. Here is my brief implementation. One can define desired dynamic behaviors inside the function DynamicLinear.
import torch
import torch.nn as nn
class DynamicLinear(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(DynamicLinear, self).__init__()
# you need to register the parameter names earlier
self.register_parameter('W_di', None)
def forward(self, x):
if self.W_di is None:
# dynamically define a linear function here
self.W_di = nn.Parameter(torch.ones(1, 1)).to(x.device)
return self.W_di # x
class MyModule(nn.Module):
def __init__(self):
super(MyModule, self).__init__()
self.net = nn.Sequential(
DynamicLinear(),
nn.ReLU(),
DynamicLinear())
def forward(self, x):
return self.net(x)
m = MyModule()
x = torch.ones(1, 1)
y = m(x)
# output: 1
print(y)